In the U.S. last fall, two outbreaks of food contamination by a
pathogenic strain of the bacterium Escherichia coli (E. coli) led to
many cases of illness and even some deaths. The journal Biotechnology
contained an editorial that essentially blamed organic agriculture for
the increase of E. coli contamination via fresh greens. Craig Holdrege
countered with a letter to the editor, which was published in the
February 2007 issue of the journal. Here is what he wrote:

To the Editor:

Clearly, editorials provide a journal the opportunity to express
opinions. But your editorial “Why silence is not an option”
(October 2006) goes too far by misrepresenting some basic facts. The
editorial laments that biotech crops get bad press while organic crops,
when something goes awry, seem to come away unscathed. Your example
is the recent contamination of fresh spinach with the food pathogen
(E. coli O157:H7) that led to numerous human illnesses and up till
now four deaths. You insinuate that organic spinach was the carrier of
the pathogen. That is not the case. The manufacturing codes from the
contaminated bags of spinach have to date all been from conventionally
and not organically grown spinach. The conventionally grown spinach was
packaged at the same warehouse as Earthbound Farm’s organic spinach
(1).

You go on to decry that no one has pointed out that “the combinations
of ‘organic’ and ‘spinach’ [are] simply a time-bomb waiting to go
off.” You provide absolutely no evidence for this radical claim. I would
expect more substance and less hyperbole from a scientific journal. The
problem of E. coli O157:H7 contamination is complex. The largest known
reservoir of these pathogens is the colon of cattle. When cattle are fed
large portions of grain—as is the case in feedlots and large factory
farms—both the number of E. coli and their acid resistance rise
significantly (2, 3, 4). This increases the likelihood that pathogenic
E. coli—including O157:H7—will survive and reproduce. Perhaps 30
to 50 percent of grain-fed cattle harbor E. coli O157:H7. Since they
are acid-resistant, if they contaminate uncooked food they survive the
acid environment of human stomachs, which normally kills most bacteria,
and then can cause serious illness.

Manure and runoff from factory farms and feedlots can easily pollute
streams and groundwater—water used to irrigate those huge vegetable
farms in California that produce most of the produce for the United
States, including fresh spinach. The FDA sees contamination of irrigation
water supplies as a primary means of spreading E. coli O157:H7 and warned
California growers about this danger in a letter

in November, 2005 (5). Factory farming and concentration of the food
supply is the issue here, not organic food. Your editorial got it
wrong.

In fact, researchers studying E. coli O157:H7 found that when cattle
feed was shifted from grain to forage (hay or silage), both the
pathogen population in the cattle and the bacterial acid resistance
dropped drastically (2, 3, 4). Although it may be hard for your biotech
advocating editorialist to swallow, he’s probably much safer eating
a hamburger made from grass-fed beef slaughtered in a local slaughter
house and topped with a piece of lettuce from his neighbor’s organic
farm that used the grass-fed cow’s composted manure as a fertilizer
than he is eating products of all-American industrial agriculture.

I would agree with your editorial’s conclusion that “there is a
basic truth that bears repetition: and that is that basic truths bear
repetition.” The basic truth I missed in your editorial is that the
recent food contamination has to do with systemic problems in conventional
industrial food production and processing. Don’t blame organic
farming.